DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 7-16, 22-30 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 2/13/2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of Species C in the reply filed on 2/13/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Species A should be combined with species A. In view of the applicant arguments, The election of species C is now considered to be (Figs 1-17, 26-31).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 17-19, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Consigny US 2010/0200192 Al .
Re claim 1, Consigny teach a helical pile assembly (fig 4) comprising: at least one shaft (9, 1) having a proximal end (top), a distal end (bottom), a cavity (annotated fig) extending along at least a portion of an interior of the shaft; at least one fluid conduit (4) having a first end insertable at least partially into the cavity and a second end (fig 4); and a pile adapter including a plate (8) and a flange (10) extending from one surface of the plate, wherein the flange is configured to mate with the proximal end of the at least one shaft (fig 4), and wherein the plate includes at least one aperture (fig 4, holes in which 4 passes through) aligned with the flange that permits the first end of the at least one fluid conduit to pass through the plate and flange into the cavity when the pile adapter is mated with the proximal end of the at least one shaft (fig 4).
Re claim 2, Consigny teach wherein the at least one fluid conduit comprises: a first fluid conduit having a first end insertable through the plate and flange into the cavity when the pile adapter is mated with the proximal end of the at least one shaft; and a second fluid conduit having a first end insertable through the plate and flange into the cavity when the pile adapter is mated with the proximal end of the at least one shaft (fig 4).
Re claim 3, Consigny teach wherein the flange has a hollow center portion configured to mate with the proximal end of the at least one shaft (fig 4).
Re claim 4, Consigny teach wherein the hollow center portion has a circular shaped inner wall configured to mate with the proximal end of the at least one shaft (figs).
Re claim 6, Consigny teach wherein the at least one fluid conduit comprises a tube (fig 4).
Re claim 17, Consigny teach a helical pile assembly comprising: at least one shaft having a proximal end, a distal end, a cavity extending along at least a portion of an interior of the shaft; a pile adapter including a plate and a flange extending from one surface of the plate, wherein the flange is configured to mate with the proximal end of the at least one shaft, and wherein the plate includes at least one aperture aligned with the flange (see the rejection of claim 1); a first fluid conduit having a first end insertable through the at least one aperture in the plate and through the flange into the cavity when the pile adapter is mated with the proximal end of the at least one shaft; and a second fluid conduit having a first end insertable through the at least one aperture in the plate and through the flange into the cavity when the pile adapter is mated with the proximal end of the at least one shaft (4 noting two conduits, see the rejection of claim 1).
Re claim 18, Consigny teach wherein the flange has a hollow center portion configured to mate with the proximal end of the at least one shaft (fig 4).
Re claim 19, Consigny teach wherein the hollow center portion has a circular shaped inner wall configured to mate with the proximal end of the at least one shaft (figs).
Re claim 21, Consigny teach wherein the first fluid conduit comprises a tube, and wherein the second fluid conduit comprises a tube (fig 4).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 5, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Consigny.
Re claim 5, Consigny discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the hollow center portion has a polygonal shaped inner wall configured to mate with the proximal end of the at least one shaft. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the shape to a polygonal shaped inner wall, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of the component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04, section IV, part B.
Re claim 20, Consigny discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the hollow center portion has a polygonal shaped inner wall configured to mate with the proximal end of the at least one shaft. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the shape to a polygonal shaped inner wall, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of the component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04, section IV, part B.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 11953237 B2, JP 2004-233031 A, US 3952802 A, US20230383492.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GORDON A JONES whose telephone number is (571)270-1218. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5 M-F PST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Len Tran can be reached at 571-272-1184. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/GORDON A JONES/Examiner, Art Unit 3763